Bug: Teleporting AK entering from off map to Tokyo area.

[Grollub]

Hi,

Playing PBEM, scenario 1.

The picture belows shows the xAK San Felipe on 19 Jan 1942, about to enter the map and merge with TF299, which is the TF NW of the off-map holding box. TF299 is my "holding TF" containing ASW forces which peel off transport TF's to WC/PH when needed. This has functioned perfectly until now.

See next post for San Felipes' position the day after.

Edited: Spelling

[Grollub]

Attaching save files from both turns in the next post.

As you can see, San Felipe is "a little" out of position the next day ... [;)][:D]

Edited: Spelling

[Grollub]

Save files.

Regards/ Grollub

[USSPC617]

I have seen the same bug in two different plays of Scenario 1 with Japanese under computer control. Under unknown circumstances, task forces seem to 'teleport' to the vicinity of the enemy's home base. One Allied TF moved next to Tokyo and in a separate game, a computer-controlled Japanese TF moved near San Francisco). In both cases fatal for the TF in question! I have only noticed this happening in December of 1941 or in January of 1942. I did not keep a save game file unfortunately.

-PC617

[Grollub]

Update: I had another AK entering map the turn afterthe one above. That one teleported to just outside Pago Pago. So far so well. The turn after that one, I have one that seems to be "stuck" in the off-map holding box. It should have entered, but didn't. It doesn't show up in the "TF-list" at the bottom of the screen. I've only managed to access that one by using the <> arrows from the TF's immdeiately before/after.

Speculation: Could this be related to the "Save the Hornet bug"? Also, I think this has to do with moving the on-map recieving TF that the off-map TF is supposed to merge with. Just a hunch.

[Grollub]

BTW ... I posted this three days ago and nobody has downloaded the save files so far. Already known bug or workload problems at tech support? [;)]

Regards/ Grollub

[pompack]

Grollub

There were some earlier posts on this but I have been unable to run down the reference. IIRC there are extremely complex issues dealing with the interaction of the off-map tracks and the "special" movement options (follow, meet, waypoint, patrol, etc). As I recall, the solutions are not known at this time and tracking them down will be very time-intensive; thus the issues have been prioritized behind others that can be run-down more quickly.

As a result, I am totally paranoid about this and I never give any special movement option to any TF that is offmap or heading offmay nor to any onmap TF if the movement option would refet to a TF offmap or moving offmap. While it will usually work, every once in a while the code gods bite and something strange will happen to your TF.

[Grollub]

ORIGINAL: pompack

Grollub

There were some earlier posts on this but I have been unable to run down the reference. IIRC there are extremely complex issues dealing with the interaction of the off-map tracks and the "special" movement options (follow, meet, waypoint, patrol, etc). As I recall, the solutions are not known at this time and tracking them down will be very time-intensive; thus the issues have been prioritized behind others that can be run-down more quickly.

As a result, I am totally paranoid about this and I never give any special movement option to any TF that is offmap or heading offmay nor to any onmap TF if the movement option would refet to a TF offmap or moving offmap. While it will usually work, every once in a while the code gods bite and something strange will happen to your TF.

Thanks for the reply pompack.

I can understand if this is a low priority item. It's annoying but hardly game breaking.

I've also ended the practice of setting off-map TF's to merge with on-map TF's. Right now I just hope that not too many of those that already have these orders ends up "getting lost" in transit. I can live with them showing up all over the map. I could tell my (hopefully confused) opponent that I'm executing a sneaky deception plan named "The Philadelphia experiment". [;)]

Hmmm ... Last turn I also got a message in the op report saying "Task Force 302 arrives at 0 , 0 but can not dock". I guess that is related to my current problem. Funny thing is I don't even have a Task Force 302. [:)]

Cheers - Grollub

[pompack]

ORIGINAL: Grollub

ORIGINAL: pompack

Grollub

There were some earlier posts on this but I have been unable to run down the reference. IIRC there are extremely complex issues dealing with the interaction of the off-map tracks and the "special" movement options (follow, meet, waypoint, patrol, etc). As I recall, the solutions are not known at this time and tracking them down will be very time-intensive; thus the issues have been prioritized behind others that can be run-down more quickly.

As a result, I am totally paranoid about this and I never give any special movement option to any TF that is offmap or heading offmay nor to any onmap TF if the movement option would refet to a TF offmap or moving offmap. While it will usually work, every once in a while the code gods bite and something strange will happen to your TF.

Thanks for the reply pompack.

I can understand if this is a low priority item. It's annoying but hardly game breaking.

I've also ended the practice of setting off-map TF's to merge with on-map TF's. Right now I just hope that not too many of those that already have these orders ends up "getting lost" in transit. I can live with them showing up all over the map. I could tell my (hopefully confused) opponent that I'm executing a sneaky deception plan named "The Philadelphia experiment". [;)]

Hmmm ... Last turn I also got a message in the op report saying "Task Force 302 arrives at 0 , 0 but can not dock". I guess that is related to my current problem. Funny thing is I don't even have a Task Force 302. [:)]

Cheers - Grollub

Just remembered one other thing. Changing destinations once they are out of the port and in the offmap tracks is also a no-no.

[Don Bowen]

I believe that a fix for the specific teleportation issue has been worked up for the next patch. As for turning around in an off map pipeline, it's good advice to not do it.

[Grollub]

Thanks for the info. I just wanted to point out that I've not changed the off-map TFs' orders while they were in the "pipe". I only gave orders once - to TFs at Cristobal/Balboa to merge with an in-map TF. Seemed to work fine as long as the recieving TF remained stationary. When I moved that TF, weird things started to happen.

Cheers - Grollub

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: Grollub

Thanks for the info. I just wanted to point out that I've not changed the off-map TFs' orders while they were in the "pipe". I only gave orders once - to TFs at Cristobal/Balboa to merge with an in-map TF. Seemed to work fine as long as the recieving TF remained stationary. When I moved that TF, weird things started to happen.

Cheers - Grollub

There is simply no code to support meet/merge/follow options for TFs moving off map. It might work in some circumstances, but if it does it is an accident.

[Grollub]

Understood and lesson learned.

Thanks again - Grollub